User talk:MVB420

June 2025

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your account has been blocked from editing because your username gives the impression that the account represents a group, team, club, organization, company, product, department, or website. Your username is the principal reason for the block. You are welcome to continue editing after you have chosen a new username that complies with Wikipedia's username policy.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable, regardless of the username that you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid or compensated in any way, you must disclose who is paying you to edit here. You may also read our FAQ for article subjects.

Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change to this account.

To create a new account with a different username, simply log out of this account and then click here to make a new one.
If you prefer to change the username of this account, you may do so by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Important items to note:

The new username that you choose must represent you as an individual person, and it must comply with Wikipedia's username policy.
- You are permitted to use a username that contains the name of a company or organization if it also identifies you individually. Examples include: "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87", but not "SEO Manager at XYZ Company".
The new username you choose cannot already be taken and used by another account. You can search here to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns, "There is no global account for [username]", that means it is available.

Appeals: If your username does not represent a group, organization, department, website, or other entity described above, and if you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply to your talk page query in due course, but your username is not permitted anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why do you think your own website is an independent third-party source, as we require here? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not. But the use of company pages is permissable.

From Wikipedia:Verifiability - Wikipedia

Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are established experts in the field, so long as:

The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
It does not involve claims about third parties;
It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
The article is not based primarily on such sources.

This is how the links were used, to verify basic facts only. That aside, only a handful of links were pointing to the company website, the majority of links are to independent sources such as leading industry magazines, the leading industry organization that we received the award from, and others. MVBTechkonUSA (talk) 19:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Article wizard

Referencing

Reliable, independent sources (see above) are preferred over non-independent sources
Non-independent sources (like company websites or press releases) can be used to verify basic facts only.

MVBTechkonUSA (talk) 19:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I understand, having a company name in my username is only against the rules if it's the only thing the username consists of.

From Wikipedia:Username policy - Wikipedia :

Usernames are not allowed on Wikipedia if they:

only contain the names of companies, organizations, websites, musical groups or bands, teams, clubs, creative groups, or organized events

Under Promotional Usernames:

However, usernames that contain such names are sometimes permissible; see § Usernames implying shared use below.

No shared use is implied in my username (nor the name of my colleague, TechkonSteph, who posted the article. To the contrary, we're openly disclosing our affiliation with the company, as required by Wikipedia rules. (The disclosure is also part of our User pages). MVBTechkonUSA (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing about my username btw, but I realize that it is not obvious that MVB are my initials, and so I have in fact requested a username change. MVBTechkonUSA (talk) 19:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: This is a courtesy notification that this account's username has been changed from "MVBTechkonUSA" to "MVB420" via a global request. If the old username was the only reason for the block, their username now complies with the username policy and the account can be unblocked. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I'm a little uneasy about your company operating two accounts. You have been transparent about that, but you need to be careful that the accounts aren't seen to be working in concert with each other. Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, you must follow the guidance below:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

It's not just the references to your own site that are problematic, others include press releases, interviews with your management and similar. While you are correct that factual information can be sourced to the company, it carries no weight in terms of establishing notability, and tends to look like "this is what we sell" rather than an encycopaeidia article. Despite what you say, your text has a self-serving and promotional tone, with weasel words like all with the operation of three easy-to-use buttons... comprehensive... designed to simplify workflows... instantly provided... an easy process thanks to the system's new features... and so on, promo, not objective facts. Also, why is your website a better source for a claimed award than that of the awarding body? And some text is unreferenced.

The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability. As already said, most of your text lacked the independent third-party sources needed to show notability. There is nothing about the company itself other than a location. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, management structure, turnover or profits. I note that the awards aren't linked to Wikipedia articles, which makes me wonder whether they are notable in themselves? Nothing you wrote shows that you meet our notability criteria.

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

Your entire article was basically a list of what you sell, sourced to yourself or press releases, with promotional commentary including, in addition to the examples above, we have the mission ... high-end... This type of software helps printers manage... to meet the requirements of their clients... When it comes to innovation, Techkon USA has won several awards... worldwide distribution channels that sell its products and has completed over 100,000 installations worldwide... all unsourced, or sourced to yourself or press releases. And there is more, but that's enough for now. And of courrse there is the obligatory "this is what we've won".

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

I didn't check.

Not reasons for deletion, but headings should be in sentence case and unbolded, and you need far more wikilinks, eg Danvers, Massachusetts, spectrophotometer.

I deleted your article because it was a list of what you sell with promotional commentary, few real references, and no actual facts about the company, so not even close to an encyclopaedia article. Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article.

I didn't hard-block your account because you had declared your COI. However, I suggest that you take your time before attempting to recreate, because unless you write something that conforms with the guidance above, I will block you again without the option of account creation. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]